Jonny
Full Version: Thanks For The Memeries — Not !!!
Sorry if this is old hat, as I tend to skip reading most of the threads about Guy Chapman these days, but I ran across this page by accident just now and it's some of the funniest stuff that I've read in a long time.
Jonny
Jonny
QUOTE(JzG)
Sometimes, people prove incapable of working collaboratively with others. We try to help them, but in the end if they are not capable of working in a collegiate manner we exclude them. This is policy, WP:BAN.
It's not possible, of course, that the people he likes could be the ones incapable of working collaboratively; it must be the others!
Banning people is an example of collegiality how?
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 11th January 2008, 4:18am) 
Banning people is an example of collegiality how?
QUOTE
Banity, Thy Name Is Collegion
It's one of the most fundamental principles of fascism that you can't really feel good about yourself and your group until you have made others feel bad by excluding them.
Jonny
QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Fri 11th January 2008, 7:04am)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 11th January 2008, 4:18am)
Banning people is an example of collegiality how?
QUOTE
Banity, Thy Name Is Collegion
It's one of the most fundamental principles of fascism that you can't really feel good about yourself and your group until you have made others feel bad by excluding them.
Jonny B)
Is this WIKIPEIDA, trying to ban those inside wiki to ban then from the WWW???
This appears to be the case with stuff like this...
QUOTE
....A banned editor is banned because their actions are destructive to the project. They do not become any less destructive when repeated in an external venue....
Bring it it dorks, is my response to this and this gem
QUOTE
....Applying the duck test, particularly in respect of banned user WordBomb's actions, it would seem to that Wikipedia Review is covered by the findings of the arbitration case. The findings are carefully worded, and reading the carefully worded findings this fits the following:....
I say, Phck the Duck... is that the god or wikipedia the duck and its history of jurisprudence. ?
or this
QUOTE
...We should aspire to a low-to-zero-tolerance approach to harassment. This is recognised (Sic)in existing policy. WP:HARASS. There is a clear difference between persecution of one's opponents, and sincere debate with an aim of achieving rapprochement or at least a truce, in order to develop content which reflects all significant points of view without editorially favouring (Sic) one or the other, deferring instead to the balance of independent scholarly opinion.
I say, What a Crock of hot piping bullshit, we know better that Wikipeida is a wildwest of urine stained walls of egomaniacs trying to show how powerful of a stream of yellow that can squit.
All of this can be found here, unless it gets deleted by revisionist wiki admins.
I could go on and on and on like the Battery bunny, but you get the point.
BRing it on wiki and try to stop me from showing the world around me that wikipedia is a
black hell hole of knowledge that makes the internet suck.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.